Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
There’s no clear definition of “vulnerable” for the virus. Yes, there are higher at risk groups but there are also those outwith having severe health impacts, and ultimately deaths.
Shutting down the economy can easily be sustained, repeated and enforced if that’s the most cost effective way of dealing with the virus.
You can continue to stand by statements all you like however when they are flawed and against all known evidence then it simply discredits your arguments.
Again based on the flawed belief that human behaviour returns to normal or that businesses can survive on reduced demand in the economy. For many they cannot - and when they scale back and put people on the dole the outcome is inevitable. An entrenched long term recession that will be harder to get out of and cost the public purse more in the long run.
Unless the Government intends to stimulate demand in the economy - but that goes against your ideology and defeats your original intent which is to keep the state out of it.
How would the numbers be lower by “protecting the vulnerable”. We protected the vulnerable, and everyone else while we were at it, and still had devastating figures.
It’s a flawed logic, ignores reality and distracts from the steps that we, and all other countries, must take if there’s to be any meaningful return to normal for the foreseeable future.
---------- Post added at 12:50 ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 ----------
Which is why elimination should have been the obvious choice. While it’s a high short term cost, it has the greatest long term gains.
|
I think that the Government only class people like me as being vulnerable (those at serious risk from the coronavirus). This has caused problems as those who are 'just' disabled don't qualify for automatic priority for online grocery slots.
Tesco includes the disabled as also being entitled to these slots e.g. blind people, but Asda are refusing to and have been threatened with group legal action for not complying with the 'reasonable adjustment' provision of the Equality Act.
---------- Post added at 21:39 ---------- Previous post was at 21:28 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
Just had a chat with my bro-in-law, who is a research SVP for a large* biosimilars company in the USA - they are, and I quote
No matter what Governments are saying, he says most of the Pharma and biosimilar companies are expecting the 2nd wave September/October, and are planning for that - it’s not just following the science, it’s following the money behind the science.
The company he works for has already started human testing of an experimental Covid-19 antibody cocktail designed as a treatment for the disease, and they should know within a month whether the treatment is effective.
*market cap of $70 billion
|
Oh I do hope so Hugh, it's absolutely awful having to stay permanently inside. It was on the news that the Government is to reduce the requirements for shielding in a couple of weeks and scrap them completely in August. This means that our free weekly box of foodstuff will stop too.
As I see it though, at this point in time, nothing has changed. There is still no vaccine and herd immunity isn't working. The only thing that has improved is that we will get a hospital bed as the NHS won't be overwhelmed now that the peak has passed.
If we catch it, we still only have a 50% chance of survival (well, slightly more since that drug was found to help the other week).
I suspect those that can will still stay inside, apart from those who have to go back to work because the Government will be stopping their Statutory Sick Pay.